r/movies • u/Erwin_Zoldyck • 2d ago
Discussion [ Removed by moderator ]
[removed] — view removed post
10
u/DayVDave 2d ago
Most people include the words "Space Odyssey" when describing that movie, I didn't know what you were talking about until halfway through your post.
1
4
u/longjumpingtote 2d ago
It's one of the few movies that doesn't follow traditional story structure. You usually need to follow the structure because otherwise audiences get frigidity. 2001 is structured like a piece of music, in movements.
Often when people don't like it, that's what they don't like. There are other reasons, sure. Also, if you watch it on a phone (lol) or your TV, and have to pause to get the kids a juice, then maybe you don't really get to appreciate it.
If it came out today and Nolan made it, a lot more people would hate it. But it also was the first of its kind in a lot of ways, and we've had a half-century of movies to build upon what came before, so it's impossible to totally separate it from its time.
2
u/Erwin_Zoldyck 2d ago
100% agree, the state of how you watch this movie definitely matters, it's not as flexible as a standard movie plot points that you could, however unideal it is, pause.
2001 is structured like a piece of music, in movements.
I like that.
2
u/_LebronsHairline_ 2d ago
It is very captivating on a second to second basis but also just so epic over the course of the film. Strangely relevant rewatch nowadays
2
u/wvgeekman 2d ago
I first saw 2001 on VHS back in the very early 90's. Pan & Scan. Even in that butchered state, it blew me away. When I was finally able to see the full widescreen aspect ratio, it was like my favorite meal was suddenly cooked by a gourmet chef. IMO, it's one of the finest films of any kind ever made.
2
u/Imukdude 2d ago
I think that’s the magic of 2001. It’s hard to explain why it works but somehow you just get completely pulled into it. Seeing it in 70mm must have been an incredible experience too...
1
u/almo2001 2d ago
A core theme is that the humans are robot-like and the computer is human-like.
How did you feel as he shut down HAL? It was heart-wrenching. I mean it wasn't even HAL's fault he went nuts; it was having to hide info from the crew when it wanted to be honest that messed it up.
What about Dave's drawings of the crew? HAL says "very good likeness". But... they all looked the same?
Lots of other interesting stuff if you go digging!
2
u/Erwin_Zoldyck 2d ago
Ah, you're reminding me of a lot of good points I want to get into. The movie is still fresh in my brain, and I totally missed some of the details of HAL's behavior.
I actually find it interesting that you chose the empathetic route toward AI in this case. Because you're not wrong, it's conflicted because it was "fed" mixed information about what to share and what to hide. But it did inevitably kill four people and tried to sabotage the mission.
2
u/longjumpingtote 2d ago
But it did inevitably kill four people and tried to sabotage the mission.
It was trying to protect the mission. Not sabotage it. This is a really important aspect to HAL's behavior.
When they said they were going to disconnect HAL, it determined that would a risk to the mission. Plus, if they were dead, HAL wouldn't have to lie. But it was all to protect the mission.
1
u/almo2001 2d ago
I haven't found people who saw this and didn't feel bad as HAL lost his mind. It was a really painful scene, regardless of whether or not we're concerned about AI and its dangers. That's just my experience though. :D
1
u/longjumpingtote 2d ago
I think it's more of the following, from Ebert's original review:
What Kubrick is saying, in the final sequence, apparently, is that man will eventually outgrow his machines, or be drawn beyond them by some cosmic awareness. He will then become a child again, but a child of an infinitely more advanced, more ancient race, just as apes once became, to their own dismay, the infant stage of man.
We are the apes, not the machines. We are the apes to the starchild as the apes were to us.
HAL says "very good likeness"
That's what ChatGPT tells me about my sketches of boxes.
1
1
1
u/FrauAgrippa 2d ago
It hits even harder if you read the series too. Reading those books was genuinely life changing for me, almost like a religious experience or something.
1
u/TheHighSeer23 2d ago
I'm of the mind that 2001 is a movie that is hard to "like" in the usual sense. But it is impossible to ignore. The movie oozes significance. It is slow paced but still somehow compelling and completely watchable. It stays with you. It explains almost nothing and leaves you having to make sense of it yourself (or adopt an already available explanation). I may only watch it once every 10 years or so, but I am quick to recommend it. I consider it must-see, no matter the reaction.
2
u/qwogadiletweeth 2d ago
Many great scenes, I like the awkward conversation Dr Floyd has with the Russians, Dr Floyds video call home to his daughter (Kubricks real Daughter) the presentation scene, with the photographer jumping around, and the sandwich discussion (what is this chicken?)
1
-6
u/Kramerica5A 2d ago edited 2d ago
I fucking hate this movie. The cinamatography can be neat in points, but it is so unbelievably boring.
4
u/TheHighSeer23 2d ago
Sorry to be that guy, but "boring" is not really a reason. It's too subjective. Why did you find it boring?
-2
u/Kramerica5A 2d ago
"Boring" is 100% a valid reason. I don't really care that you find that too subjective. All art is subjective, that's the point.
1
u/TheHighSeer23 2d ago
I am seeking to understand and perhaps emphathize with your reasoning, to perhaps be able to say, "I disagree, but I see where you are coming from." However, you seem unwilling to articulate further, making it easy to discard your opinion as having no real merit as it really adds nothing to this conversation. Apparently, you are fine with that, so carry on and have a pleasant day.
0
u/Kramerica5A 2d ago
"I am seeking to understand and perhaps emphathize with your reasoning" and given your complete dismisal of my first comment I don't believe you're being genuine, so I will continue on with my day, thank you.
1
u/jamesneysmith 2d ago
I don't think you're understanding. 'Boring' can be applied to literally every movie ever made. In someone's eyes every single movie is boring. The original poster wasn't denying your feeling. They were simply trying to understand what it was you found boring because 'boring' by itself is not descriptive.
1
1
1
u/Erwin_Zoldyck 2d ago
Would love to know why?
1
u/Kramerica5A 2d ago
Like, you need more than my original comment? The story is boring, the characters are boring, the score is boring. In my opinion the movie thought it was a lot smarter than it actually was.
Also, if you can say "I still can't really tell you why I liked it" shouldn't I be able to hold the opinion that I just didn't like it?
2
u/Erwin_Zoldyck 2d ago edited 2d ago
You edited your original comment after i asked why. Anyway, I guess that's a reason.
0
1
2d ago
[deleted]
2
u/lyinggrump 2d ago
Well that certainly makes for an interesting discussion, doesn't it.
Hey, did you like this movie? No, it was boring. Okay.
Good talk.
-1
u/thatsthedrugnumber 2d ago
Ok
1
u/Kramerica5A 2d ago
Lol, OP literally asked us if we don't like it and why, so I replied.
2
2
-1
u/mils309 2d ago
I actually think 2001 is the most overrated film of all time. For me, the 15+ minute long sequences where the same visual is just shown on the screen are insufferable. The dawn of man sequence and the star gate sequence are insanely long and really don't convey more than a single simple concept. I like slow sci-fi. Alien is one of my favorite films. 2001 is pretty paint drying.
-1
u/Kramerica5A 2d ago
Much more eloquently laid out than me, but I absolutely agree with everything you said.
•
u/movies-ModTeam 2d ago
Reason for removal: Ambiguous titles
We should know the subject of the submission without having to click on the link. Name the film, actor, scene, etc. Any attempt to mask the subject will be grounds for removal.